In the other message. Jrichmond said he was going to
Singapore. Hope he bought the 828 and compared it
with both the F55 and the T1. I want to try a V1 too
but don't know where to borrow it. I'm suspecting that
the V1, P10 is similar to the T1 in its light meter because
they are supposed to be standard. And since 5 megapixel
has almost the same area as the 2 megapixel F55. The
older digicam can produce much cleaner image with the consequence that it can boost ISO up and still maintain
good image owing to good signal to noise ratio in the
sensor. What this means is that the F55 or other older
2 megapixel based digicam may beat all 5 megapixel
cameras in the market today be it pentax, canon or sony
since these modern sensors have much smaller light pixel producing less signal to noise ratio.

I don't know. Right now I'm thinking where I can borrow a
V1 or P10. If anyone here has both a T1 and V1 or P10. Pls.
kindly assist in the comparisons. If they are similar to the
T1 in shutter response and light metering. Then I'll be
satisfied with the old F55 (at least it's useful... I can take
quick shots and it's still sharp, something the T1 can never
do after a month testing out different techniques and
settings like increasing the ISO but getting very significant
noises). Anyway. If the V1 or P10 is obviously better.
I'll purchase a V1. I just want to make sure. I don't want
to buy a V1 and sold it afterwards cheaper just like I did with
the T1 which made me lost $120.

I was in Singapore and almost bought a camera, but the merchant was playing games with me and trying to rip me off and I had a flight to run for!

One thing I did do was talk to a number of merchants as well as to Sony, and problems with the T1 seem to be generally known. While in the Sony showroom I did a shoot out, aiming at a counter with the word "Sony" on it, and it was clear that the sharpness of the T1 was well below par. Looking at exposure times, it was clear why: other cameras will do the shot in a far faster exposure.

I have done tests including the current model DSC-P72, etc.
And this is what I can say.

The T1 is just average. It is not abnormal. It functions
according to the F3.5 aperture specification. So if the user understands what he would use it for. It is for all intent
and purposes appropriate for his needs.

When I tried the DSC-P72, P10, P8 and aim at low light. It
registered shutter speed proportional to its focal
ratio which is F2.8. For example, using both P72 and
T1 side by side. The P72 registered 1/13 sec while
the T1 1/8 sec in Program Mode. This is right according
to their respective focal ratio of F2.8 and F3.5 (or
brightness due to aperture size increase)

About the F55. It's sensor is bigger and fixed lens
(considering it's two megapixel). So image is sharper
compared to all the modern one. This is why it can
make all those low light shots that is of better
sharpness than not just the T1 but the P10,
P72, etc.

But note the F55 is big and not pocket friendly in
comparison to the T1, and like you said. Many
features are outdated. Because consumers dig for
megapixels. The manufacturers just all up them and
there's nothing we can do about it except buying
and using old F55 or S70.

Those who will own a T1 understand that they will use
it outdoor at daytime and with flash at night.

For those who need extensive low light shots. The new model
W1 would be more appropriate as it is fully manual, F2.8, with
tripod and same VGA 30fps and all the other goodies. But
it is thicker (1.25") versus the T1 0.8".

But let's face it. How many of us do low light shots without
flash. Only us mainly Jrichmond that's why it concerns us so
much. For those that don't need it. T1 works according to its
specification and low shutter speed of F3.5 compared
to the other F2.8 digicams. It is ISO calibrated.

I'm tired of all this T1 stuff. I'll just wait for the new DSC-W1 to
be released in May or hopefully April in Asia and will surely
get one without second thought.

Let's stop hitting the T1's limitations (which can belittle
its highlight such as much faster start up times, shot times
and almost no shutter lag compared to most digicams).

OK I was keen on getting the T1 because of its small size. These threads / pictures have really put me off of it in a BIG way. SO, what do you recommend for a small size pocket digital camera that would yield better results? (Brand of camera doesn't matter).

Relatives of mine have the Canon S400 powershot (4 MP) and are very happy. Any suggestions?

Rob, I cannot profess to be an expert in alternatives,
especially as a large number of new cameras are appeaing or should be available soon. I would recommend avoiding my mistake, which was a failure to appreciate that an F3.5 lens with zoom is not going to be effective under low light. I would go for an F2.8 or lower.

Of course, you will want to check lens quality and other characteristics, and I can only suggest waiting for reviews and reading several of them because it is my observation that many reviewers, in their hurry to get something online, miss critical flaws.

Again thanks for this fascinating thread. Its a crash course on what to look out for!

Mestleman: you have made conclusions about the sixze of the sensor being a very important factor in regard to the pictures discussed. The older 2 MP cameras have a larger sensor, and is this what makes them able to cleanly go up to ISO 400?

More specifically, can you tell me what to look for in any brand of camera's specifications, in regard to the sensor size? I'm a bit new at this, so what should the sensor size be to get these better results?

Rob, if you want a nice pocketable digicam that takes great pics you will have no problems with the S400. I just got my T1, and am returning it to Sony because my S400 beats up on it in picture quality. You can find the S400 for like $300 or so from Dell (I think for the next couple days). That's if you need it now, otherwise I plan on checking out the DSC-W1 the day it hits the market.

On the other hand, if you got a T1 you wouldn't have much to compare it to, like I have for the last year of use for my S400. You'd probably think it looks pretty good, but I can tell you it isn't quite up there with the Canon.